|
The Palestinian resistance is legal
08-02-2010,12: 40
Judge: Deyaa Edeen Al Madhoun
"Head of the central committee for Documentation and Pursual of Zionist war criminals"
Resistance recognizes the meaning of commitment to international law
Public opinion in most countries began to change in support of the resistance
The Zionist entity transferred its civilians to dangerous areas
Palestinian resistance has exercised its legitimate right under commitment to the rules of international humanitarian law
In an exclusive interview with Al Qassam website, judge Deyaa Al Madhoun, head of the central committee for documentation and Pursual of Zionist war criminals, confirmed that the military operations performed by the Palestinian resistance are legal tools in defending our people against the Zionist aggression according to the international law.
Here… the full text of the interview:
How would you describe the legal status of the Palestinian resistance according to the international law?
At first, I want to say that the international laws ensure the Palestinian people to resist against the continuous aggression of the Zionist occupation to restore their stolen rights and liberate their home, Palestine.
The military operations performed by the Palestinian resistance are legal tools in defending our people against the Zionist aggression according to the text of the General Assembly of the United Nations No. (5 / 2621) which says: "The occupied people has the right to struggle by various means against colonial Powers which suppress their aspirations for freedom and independence" .
The General Assembly of the United Nations has stressed in more than one resolution on the right of peoples struggle for independence, and freedom from occupation and foreign domination. Indeed, the United Nations Charter, Article (51) consider that any state has a natural right to defend itself if they were exposed to armed aggression, and the last Zionist aggression on the Gaza Strip is the best model for defining the crime of aggression from the legal and international perspective.
The legal basis in international law established that no legitimate defense against the legitimate defense, and as long as our defense and our practice of resistance is legitimate and in accordance with international law, the occupation claim of defending himself is considered as crimes and illegal acts in international law.
If the resistance is legitimate, Why does the west call it terror?
The International law established rules for controlling operations of war as it warned from targeting civilians and civilian facilities by any of the parties. The Zionist occupation had succeeded to use these legal rules in his favor in the past; it is still fabricating in front of the world public opinion and the West in particular that the Palestinian resistance is a criminal groups seek to kill civilians, and to kill Jews in a racist manner, and that the Palestinian resistance seeks to destabilize the security and stability in the region.
The fact that we are an occupied people exercise our legitimate right to resist occupation and to defend ourselves was hidden because of our weakness in the media field, so the West believed the Zionist story. But, I can say that in the era of satellite and free media, in which we live, a lot have understood the correct message of resistance and the message of the Palestinian people, and it has become clear who is the victim and who is the victimizer.
Observing the international reports, I think that the public opinion in most countries began to change to support the resistance. This is what we have observed after the recent aggression on Gaza.
If we talked about the aggression on the Gaza Strip, Did the resistance factions in Gaza took this law in consideration, although it is not a regular army?
The Palestinian resistance had confirmed in more than one situation that it abide by the rules of international law and it fires rockets to military objectives such as tanks bases, military airports and occupying forces sites, and thus the resistance understand the meaning of commitment to international law.
The occupation claimed that 3 civilians were killed by the rockets of the resistance; this claim refuted by two things:
Despite all efforts to avoid harming citizens, the rockets of the resistance are inaccurate missiles in striking targets, and therefore it may miss its target little bit. This is what happens in all the armed clashes. And if 3 civilians were killed – so to claim – during the 22-day during which hundreds of rockets were fired, this confirms that the civilians were not the target of these missiles; otherwise, dozens might had been killed.
The occupation claimed that the areas hit by the rockets of the resistance is part of the Zionist entity, the international law has another point of view, where Oslo agreement is not considered as a final solution to a final demarcation of the border, so we depend on United Nations resolutions despite our reservations on the resolution, but in accordance with that, all towns which were hit by rocket fire are within the boundaries of the Arab state according to the partition resolution. Here, we see that "the Zionist entity" had committed a crime by transferring its civilian population to areas of conflict.
Does the a report of Judge Goldstone have any risk on resistance?
The report of the UN mission headed by Judge Goldstone is one of the strongest reports condemning the Zionist occupation forces of committing war crimes. The report has strengthened the charges with evidences in more than 500 pages, and at the same time the resistance was acquitted of allegations that it used civilians as human shields. In addition, it emphasized that police officers who have been targeted in the first day of the aggression were civilians, and that targeting them is a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law and a war crime.
However, I have some reservations on the last ten papers in which the report refers that the resistance may have committed war crimes by targeting civilians, but these accusations were devoid of evidence and legal basis and would fail before the rules of international law.
Under the threat of a new aggression on the Gaza Strip, Does that mean that the Zionists are not deterred, despite having committed war crimes in the aggression?
We are still in the beginning of their path in the prosecution of leaders and soldiers of the Zionist occupation, we are aware when we started down this road obstacles and drilling us of double standards, and disruption of the international balance of power, which favored the occupation until the moment, we are all appreciate that the question of prosecution is cumulative and will be achieved gradually. The world must realize that the feeling that the criminal occupier outside the circle of accountability will be tempted to commit more atrocities and crimes and put an end to political impunity will be enhanced for the rule of international law and the guarantor for the deployment of international justice and emphasizing the remedy victims of aggression, and finally will be a deterrent to anyone with the same question of international crimes.
Here, I think we have begun the first step and I think it was a successful move, but I think it has achieved part of our goal, but we will make more effort and time in order to deter the occupier and criminals from committing more atrocities and crimes against the Palestinian people, but will endeavor to describe our children who are victims of aggression and emphasize their right to compensation.
|
